5 ms·

I don't think killing solar and wind projects is what the greens do. The problems with solar and wind are entirely due to the laws of physics. They get large

I don't think killing solar and wind projects is what the greens do. The problems with solar and wind are entirely due to the laws of physics. They get large advantages in the energy markets in most places. They have been very effective in preventing nuclear though which ironically does so much real world damage to their cause that all the rest of what they do is a drop in the bucket.

croes 8mo ago
Our problem isn’t energy production, it’s storage. Nuclear power plants aren’t flexible enough for sudden changes in energy consumption.
- mpweiher 8mo ago
  The storage problem is home-made, because our problem is intermittent renewables that can't produce on-demand. With consistent producers like nuclear there is no storage problem. And of course the Natrium plant has the buffer so it can ramp grid output up and down while maintaining the reactor at consistent power levels.
  - ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
    > With consistent producers like nuclear there is no storage problem. This tells me you’ve never looked at a demand curve. In for example California the demand swings from 18 GW to 50 GW over the day and seasons. The problem has always been economical. And this solution is looking like a bandaid to get taxpayer handouts. Why store expensive nuclear electricity rather than extremely cheap renewable electricity?
    - stinkbeetle 8mo ago
      > This tells me you’ve never looked at a demand curve. In for example California the demand swings from 18 GW to 50 GW over the day Have you been looking at "net demand" curves? Total demand variation is not too large over the day. The wind/solar production enormously increases the magnitude of remaining demand difference over the day. https://www.caiso.com/todays-outlook https://www.caiso.com/todays-outlook > and seasons. Nobody is talking about batteries to deal with demand swings between seasons though. Capacity has to accommodate whether it's nuclear or fossil or battery or renewable. The issue is day to day variation. And it does not matter how much wind/solar capacity you have, you can't supply demand without storage. That is untrue of other generation types. Other generation might use batteries to take the edge of peaks, but that would only be done if it made total cost cheaper. That's not the case for renewables. If there were no other generation then they would have to use storage, so it's always going to make them more expensive.
      - ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
        The net demand curve varies 30 GW over the period you posted? It goes 7 GW negative. The problem with nuclear power is that about all costs are fixed. It costs 18-24 cents/kWh when running at 100% for 40 years excluding backup, transmission, final waste disposal and taxes. Now remove any earning potential from large portions of the day coming from renewables and storage and the economics simply does not pan a out.
        Moldoteck 8mo ago
        Are you sure with the numbers? Maybe for failed projects like Vogtle it may be true but otherwise, the cost is about 4.7ct/kwh everything included looking at swiss open data. And Goesgen didn't run at 100% CF all these years.
        ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
        Same costs for HPC, FV3, Polish AP1000s and EPR2s as well. I don't see the relevance comparing with a plant that start construction over half a century ago?
        Moldoteck 8mo ago
        Do you want to compare maybe with barakah which was not a foak and didn't have the supply chain issues like with epr/ap1000?
        ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
        You mean middle eastern labor and design that doesn’t fly with western regulations? Sounds applicable! Let’s first acknowledge that KHNP pulled out of all western projects except the Czech one after their settlement with Westinghouse. They don’t exist as an option. Then let’s look at the Czech subsidies. They aren’t materially different compared to any other modern western nuclear construction. They’ve shaved a few billion from the headline number but the project is still pure cost plus putting all construction and financial risk on the governments tab.
    - mpweiher 8mo ago
      Where did I claim that all demand was flat? That's right: nowhere! Which is why some solar can be a good addition. But there is a lot that is flat. And for that you need solid, steady generation capacity.
      - ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
        Do you think that demand is willing to pay 18-24 cents per kWh excluding backup, insurance, transmission, final waste disposal etc.? I can tell you they won’t. Which is why there’s currently 0 commercial nuclear reactors under construction in the US. You also have to look at it from incentives. Why should a person or company with solar and storage buy horrifyingly expensive nuclear power from the grid when their own installation delivers? Well, they don’t. Why should their neighbors prefer horrifyingly expensive grid based nuclear electricity to their neighbors excess renewables? Well, they don’t. Do you know what they do instead? These steady consumers. They buy financial instruments like futures and PPAs to ensure steady price and supply. The problem for new built nuclear power is that these financial instruments costs a fraction of the price new built nuclear power requires. New built nuclear power is the fax of the internet age. It is time to let go.
        mpweiher 8mo ago
        Good grief. The exact opposite of what you write is true. Please inform yourself. They are currently buying up all the nuclear they can get their hands on, reactivating shut down plants, investing both in startups and in existing players to build as much nuclear as they can: https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2026/02/19/why-microsoft-and-amazon-are-turning-to-nuclear-power-for-ai/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2026/02/19/why-microsof... https://neutronbytes.com/2025/11/20/terrapower-natrium-reactor-on-the-grid-by-2031/ https://neutronbytes.com/2025/11/20/terrapower-natrium-react... https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/google-to-fund-elementl-to-prepare-three-nuclear-power-sites https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/google-to-fund-e... https://www.ans.org/news/2025-12-10/article-7608/vc-summer-update-mou-signed-with-brookfield/ https://www.ans.org/news/2025-12-10/article-7608/vc-summer-u... https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/palisades-receives-fuel-ahead-of-restart https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/palisades-receiv... https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/westinghouse-and-fortum-to-deploy-advanced-ap1000-reactor-in-nordics/ar-AA1HlVv7 https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/westinghouse-and-f... https://highlandscurrent.org/2026/03/07/lawler-announces-plan-to-rebuild-indian-point/ https://highlandscurrent.org/2026/03/07/lawler-announces-pla...
  - croes 8mo ago
    Nuclear power plants and the electric networks have a big problem when power consumption has sudden big changes, like this https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/a-new-threat-to-power-grids-data-centers-unplugging-at-once-741f1bda https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/a-new-threat-to-powe... Storage would mean just to reroute the energy to storage, otherwise you need to lower the power plant‘s output what doesn’t happen fast in nuclear power plants
- chickenbig 8mo ago
  France seems to work. They have plenty of nuclear power that is flexible. And you can have other forms of consumption flexibility; otherwise wind and solar are really in trouble.
  - ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
    France uses their own and their neighbors fossil capacity to manage nuclear inflexibility. When a cold spell hits France exports turn to imports. Now EDF is crying about renewables lowering nuclear earning potential and increasing maintenance costs. The problem is that they are up against economic incentives. Why should a company or person with solar and storage buy grid based nuclear power? They don’t. Why should they not sell their excess to their neighbors? They do. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns-solar-wind-surge-straining-nuclear-fleet-costs https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns...
    - Moldoteck 8mo ago
      No it doesn't. You can see it https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/generation-achieved-by-unit.html https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/g... French nuclear is more flexible than coal by design and as flexible as many older gas plants with ALFC system. They can reach up to 0.5%/second modulation (proved by Philipsburg) if the situation requires but it's rarely the case if you have a fleet. It's still not as fast as BWR's that can reach 1%/second but german coal is the slowest load follower and still meets min requirements imposed by the grid. "When a cold spell hits France exports turn to imports." - was true in the past, a bit, but afaik this and last winter France was net exporting a ton. And with FLA3 reaching full capacity this year it'll be even less of a problem. It's not like they have a problem now, they are the largest net exporter on the continent and it's unlikely to change soon. "Now EDF is crying about renewables lowering nuclear earning potential and increasing maintenance costs." - yes, because ren generation is acting like a parasitic source without proper BESS deployments - they eat into firm power profits without providing firm power benefits. "Why should a company or person with solar and storage buy grid based nuclear power? They don’t." - because in many places of the world solar+bess are not sufficient. It's also the reason why Microsoft signed a contract for TMI way above market prices instead of building a fully offgrid ren solution EDF is selling power to neighbors and makes money from it. It also is modulating it's npp a lot, which will maybe change when AC's will be more widely deployed and EV's will expand. It also is trying to schedule most maintenance works in summer, during lowest demand periods
- Moldoteck 8mo ago
  Nuclear power is one of the most flexible sources of power, especially PWR's with ALFC or even more so - BWR's You can actually see how France is flexing in the summer on RTE website
  - ZeroGravitas 8mo ago
    France's nuclear operators have been claiming this for years. But recently started claiming that wind and solar are bad because they force nuclear to flex which is too expensive. > Electricite de France SA said growing solar and wind generation was increasing equipment wear and maintenance costs at its nuclear reactors, which are forced to reduce output when power demand is insufficient. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns-solar-wind-surge-straining-nuclear-fleet-costs https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns...
    - Moldoteck 8mo ago
      "France's nuclear operators have been claiming this for years. But recently started claiming that wind and solar are bad because they force nuclear to flex which is too expensive." - one doesnt disprove the other. French nuclear is extremely flexible https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/generation-achieved-by-unit.html https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/g... but it doesn't mean it's free. Solar and wind without proper bess to support them are creating problems for other generators, acting as grid parasites without offering proper firm generation
      - pfdietz 8mo ago
        The flexibility claim was always the same lie: that what mattered was technical flexibility, when economic flexibility wasn't there.
        Moldoteck 8mo ago
        That's false too. Most of the arguments from antinuclear activists in this direction are about physical capacity of modulating too slow, which was false. Regardless, EDF is modulating now mostly due to economic reasons. Above 50-60% capacity factor you'll be fine, beyond that it'll be problematic with any asset, at which point you'll need to ask yourself if you love gas or you let nuclear run for some minimal CF or if you mandate each NPP to build a bess buffer to absorb capacity when needed
amanaplanacanal 8mo ago
Sorry, I was talking about the fake environmentalists being funded by the fossil fuel industry. And the fossil fuel industry is still successfully killing solar and wind projects in the US.

croes 8mo ago

Our problem isn’t energy production, it’s storage. Nuclear power plants aren’t flexible enough for sudden changes in energy consumption.

mpweiher 8mo ago
The storage problem is home-made, because our problem is intermittent renewables that can't produce on-demand. With consistent producers like nuclear there is no storage problem. And of course the Natrium plant has the buffer so it can ramp grid output up and down while maintaining the reactor at consistent power levels.
- ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
  > With consistent producers like nuclear there is no storage problem. This tells me you’ve never looked at a demand curve. In for example California the demand swings from 18 GW to 50 GW over the day and seasons. The problem has always been economical. And this solution is looking like a bandaid to get taxpayer handouts. Why store expensive nuclear electricity rather than extremely cheap renewable electricity?
  - stinkbeetle 8mo ago
    > This tells me you’ve never looked at a demand curve. In for example California the demand swings from 18 GW to 50 GW over the day Have you been looking at "net demand" curves? Total demand variation is not too large over the day. The wind/solar production enormously increases the magnitude of remaining demand difference over the day. https://www.caiso.com/todays-outlook https://www.caiso.com/todays-outlook > and seasons. Nobody is talking about batteries to deal with demand swings between seasons though. Capacity has to accommodate whether it's nuclear or fossil or battery or renewable. The issue is day to day variation. And it does not matter how much wind/solar capacity you have, you can't supply demand without storage. That is untrue of other generation types. Other generation might use batteries to take the edge of peaks, but that would only be done if it made total cost cheaper. That's not the case for renewables. If there were no other generation then they would have to use storage, so it's always going to make them more expensive.
    - ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
      The net demand curve varies 30 GW over the period you posted? It goes 7 GW negative. The problem with nuclear power is that about all costs are fixed. It costs 18-24 cents/kWh when running at 100% for 40 years excluding backup, transmission, final waste disposal and taxes. Now remove any earning potential from large portions of the day coming from renewables and storage and the economics simply does not pan a out.
      - Moldoteck 8mo ago
        Are you sure with the numbers? Maybe for failed projects like Vogtle it may be true but otherwise, the cost is about 4.7ct/kwh everything included looking at swiss open data. And Goesgen didn't run at 100% CF all these years.
        ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
        Same costs for HPC, FV3, Polish AP1000s and EPR2s as well. I don't see the relevance comparing with a plant that start construction over half a century ago?
        Moldoteck 8mo ago
        Do you want to compare maybe with barakah which was not a foak and didn't have the supply chain issues like with epr/ap1000?
        ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
        You mean middle eastern labor and design that doesn’t fly with western regulations? Sounds applicable! Let’s first acknowledge that KHNP pulled out of all western projects except the Czech one after their settlement with Westinghouse. They don’t exist as an option. Then let’s look at the Czech subsidies. They aren’t materially different compared to any other modern western nuclear construction. They’ve shaved a few billion from the headline number but the project is still pure cost plus putting all construction and financial risk on the governments tab.
  - mpweiher 8mo ago
    Where did I claim that all demand was flat? That's right: nowhere! Which is why some solar can be a good addition. But there is a lot that is flat. And for that you need solid, steady generation capacity.
    - ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
      Do you think that demand is willing to pay 18-24 cents per kWh excluding backup, insurance, transmission, final waste disposal etc.? I can tell you they won’t. Which is why there’s currently 0 commercial nuclear reactors under construction in the US. You also have to look at it from incentives. Why should a person or company with solar and storage buy horrifyingly expensive nuclear power from the grid when their own installation delivers? Well, they don’t. Why should their neighbors prefer horrifyingly expensive grid based nuclear electricity to their neighbors excess renewables? Well, they don’t. Do you know what they do instead? These steady consumers. They buy financial instruments like futures and PPAs to ensure steady price and supply. The problem for new built nuclear power is that these financial instruments costs a fraction of the price new built nuclear power requires. New built nuclear power is the fax of the internet age. It is time to let go.
      - mpweiher 8mo ago
        Good grief. The exact opposite of what you write is true. Please inform yourself. They are currently buying up all the nuclear they can get their hands on, reactivating shut down plants, investing both in startups and in existing players to build as much nuclear as they can: https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2026/02/19/why-microsoft-and-amazon-are-turning-to-nuclear-power-for-ai/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2026/02/19/why-microsof... https://neutronbytes.com/2025/11/20/terrapower-natrium-reactor-on-the-grid-by-2031/ https://neutronbytes.com/2025/11/20/terrapower-natrium-react... https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/google-to-fund-elementl-to-prepare-three-nuclear-power-sites https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/google-to-fund-e... https://www.ans.org/news/2025-12-10/article-7608/vc-summer-update-mou-signed-with-brookfield/ https://www.ans.org/news/2025-12-10/article-7608/vc-summer-u... https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/palisades-receives-fuel-ahead-of-restart https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/palisades-receiv... https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/westinghouse-and-fortum-to-deploy-advanced-ap1000-reactor-in-nordics/ar-AA1HlVv7 https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/westinghouse-and-f... https://highlandscurrent.org/2026/03/07/lawler-announces-plan-to-rebuild-indian-point/ https://highlandscurrent.org/2026/03/07/lawler-announces-pla...
- croes 8mo ago
  Nuclear power plants and the electric networks have a big problem when power consumption has sudden big changes, like this https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/a-new-threat-to-power-grids-data-centers-unplugging-at-once-741f1bda https://www.wsj.com/business/energy-oil/a-new-threat-to-powe... Storage would mean just to reroute the energy to storage, otherwise you need to lower the power plant‘s output what doesn’t happen fast in nuclear power plants
chickenbig 8mo ago
France seems to work. They have plenty of nuclear power that is flexible. And you can have other forms of consumption flexibility; otherwise wind and solar are really in trouble.
- ViewTrick1002 8mo ago
  France uses their own and their neighbors fossil capacity to manage nuclear inflexibility. When a cold spell hits France exports turn to imports. Now EDF is crying about renewables lowering nuclear earning potential and increasing maintenance costs. The problem is that they are up against economic incentives. Why should a company or person with solar and storage buy grid based nuclear power? They don’t. Why should they not sell their excess to their neighbors? They do. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns-solar-wind-surge-straining-nuclear-fleet-costs https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns...
  - Moldoteck 8mo ago
    No it doesn't. You can see it https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/generation-achieved-by-unit.html https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/g... French nuclear is more flexible than coal by design and as flexible as many older gas plants with ALFC system. They can reach up to 0.5%/second modulation (proved by Philipsburg) if the situation requires but it's rarely the case if you have a fleet. It's still not as fast as BWR's that can reach 1%/second but german coal is the slowest load follower and still meets min requirements imposed by the grid. "When a cold spell hits France exports turn to imports." - was true in the past, a bit, but afaik this and last winter France was net exporting a ton. And with FLA3 reaching full capacity this year it'll be even less of a problem. It's not like they have a problem now, they are the largest net exporter on the continent and it's unlikely to change soon. "Now EDF is crying about renewables lowering nuclear earning potential and increasing maintenance costs." - yes, because ren generation is acting like a parasitic source without proper BESS deployments - they eat into firm power profits without providing firm power benefits. "Why should a company or person with solar and storage buy grid based nuclear power? They don’t." - because in many places of the world solar+bess are not sufficient. It's also the reason why Microsoft signed a contract for TMI way above market prices instead of building a fully offgrid ren solution EDF is selling power to neighbors and makes money from it. It also is modulating it's npp a lot, which will maybe change when AC's will be more widely deployed and EV's will expand. It also is trying to schedule most maintenance works in summer, during lowest demand periods
Moldoteck 8mo ago
Nuclear power is one of the most flexible sources of power, especially PWR's with ALFC or even more so - BWR's You can actually see how France is flexing in the summer on RTE website
- ZeroGravitas 8mo ago
  France's nuclear operators have been claiming this for years. But recently started claiming that wind and solar are bad because they force nuclear to flex which is too expensive. > Electricite de France SA said growing solar and wind generation was increasing equipment wear and maintenance costs at its nuclear reactors, which are forced to reduce output when power demand is insufficient. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns-solar-wind-surge-straining-nuclear-fleet-costs https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-02-16/edf-warns...
  - Moldoteck 8mo ago
    "France's nuclear operators have been claiming this for years. But recently started claiming that wind and solar are bad because they force nuclear to flex which is too expensive." - one doesnt disprove the other. French nuclear is extremely flexible https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/generation-achieved-by-unit.html https://www.services-rte.com/en/view-data-published-by-rte/g... but it doesn't mean it's free. Solar and wind without proper bess to support them are creating problems for other generators, acting as grid parasites without offering proper firm generation
    - pfdietz 8mo ago
      The flexibility claim was always the same lie: that what mattered was technical flexibility, when economic flexibility wasn't there.
      - Moldoteck 8mo ago
        That's false too. Most of the arguments from antinuclear activists in this direction are about physical capacity of modulating too slow, which was false. Regardless, EDF is modulating now mostly due to economic reasons. Above 50-60% capacity factor you'll be fine, beyond that it'll be problematic with any asset, at which point you'll need to ask yourself if you love gas or you let nuclear run for some minimal CF or if you mandate each NPP to build a bess buffer to absorb capacity when needed

amanaplanacanal 8mo ago

Sorry, I was talking about the fake environmentalists being funded by the fossil fuel industry. And the fossil fuel industry is still successfully killing solar and wind projects in the US.